Electronic Journal of e-Learning Volume 5 Issue 1 2007 (1 - 10)
travel/timetable restrictions (Baillie 2006). Also related to this factor, our complementary survey (see section 6.3) found that 88% of the students reported the need to work and 26% that they had major personal commitments. At this midpoint in our investigation, in contrast to the study by Colby (2004) and Burd and Hodgson (2005) another surprising result is that we found no correlation between attainment and attendance. Our survey shows that there are complex factors, which affect the amount of work done on the course. At a time when personal commitments and the need to work are making increasing demands on student time and making it harder to justify travelling to attend classes, the availability of web-based material may compensate for lack of student attendance. A study by Jefferies et al. (2004) found that 50% of students felt that StudyNet had improved the way they learn, and this is corroborated by our survey.
responded said that they either had or needed a job. The median average number of hours worked or expected to work was about 12.5 hours. 50% of the students who wanted or needed a job expected to do paid work for between 10 and 16 hours per week, with a further 25% of the students expecting to do paid work for between 16 and 25 hours. Such paid work represents a considerable commitment, particularly where students are expected (ideally) to be studying between 30 and 40 hours a week. 26% of students who responded indicated that they had major personal commitments, but for ethical reasons we did not ask students to provide details on those commitments.
7. Discussion One of the surprising results of our investigation so far is the mismatch between reported perceptions and corroborating evidence. Tutors often regard attendance at traditional class contact sessions as a key factor in a student's success. Our survey, like that completed by Burd and Hodgson (2005) showed that there is a perception amongst some tutors that the availability of teaching resources on MLEs has a detrimental impact on student attendance. However, as in their study, evidence to support the view that the presence of a MLE does impact on student attendance is inconclusive. Our survey shows that students themselves do not regard the availability of teaching resources on the MLE as a factor in their non-attendance. However, our investigations also show that students' perception of the extent of their (fairly high) attendance is not supported by other evidence. There may be several reasons for this: students completing the survey may wish to present themselves in a better light, they may not be able to isolate their attendance on this course from their general attendance or be unable to separate out the different modes of attendance, or their perception of how well they are doing on the course may colour their perception of how well they attend.
In the survey of student's preferred ways of working there is still extensive student support for traditional modes of delivery. It is not surprising that practical exercises are rated very highly, since the aim of the course is to develop practical skills and the practical exercises both provide opportunities to implement concepts and allow students to gauge their progress. However, the high ranking given to other traditional modes of delivery such as lectures, practicals and tutorials is surprising, especially when put alongside the student's lack of attendance at these events. The use of the discussion forum increased considerably during an assessment with many sensible postings and responses from students. Whereas in the past a student would talk to a limited number of friends, the discussion allowed the whole cohort access to queries and replies. Although we could not find evidence to support the view that the MLE was causing a lack of attendance, there is some evidence to show that the MLE is changing the way both students and tutors work, even though this may not be supported by their reported perceptions. Attendance at timetabled class sessions may not be essential for motivated, capable students or if students can get the same quality of support in other ways. Many of the students in our group expressed opinions such as “I would rather work on my own at home without distractions� and again this is not surprising on a course where a student has to practice to develop their own skills especially since the programming environment itself provides valuable feedback.
In addition, factors other than the MLE such as timetabling may be important in determining the level of student attendance. Pearce (2005) analysed absenteeism among first year students and found that the main self-reported reasons were illness, lectures too late or early in the day, under the influence of drink or drugs, and having only one lecture in the day. Such factors may not only influence student attendance but also the amount of work done for the course and hence their success on the course. An internal survey of all Computer Science students at the University of Hertfordshire found that the biggest single contributer to absence from classes was
www.ejel.org
However, lack of attendance can be problematic for those students who may need more intensive and personalised support. Lack of attendance by some of the students in a group can create
8
ŠAcademic Conferences Ltd